Multi Player games

[Jeff Conner]

Looks like we have Steve, Cats and Rabbit wanting to play. And everyone agrees, it can be a lot of fun. One of the advantages that SB has over some of the other Tiller games in this regard is that the scenarios don't usually have as many turns, hence they don't drag on forever.

For those of you not familiar with the Ardennes Christmas campaign, it is semi-historical, based on the fight between the 2nd Armored and the 2nd Panzer on Christmas Eve near Celles. I created an OOB of similar units for each side, basically a tank battalion, an armored infantry battalion and a leg infantry battalion with supporting units. Both sides have the same morale for all units. There are some advantages, like US infantry units having more men than German ones, but I think that most of this balances out in the wash (for example German infantry have more hand-held AT weapons). As I mentioned before, I'll put the scenario together if enough people want to play. And if you would like to play something else, go for it.

[Stejones82]

I am not in, Jeff. I am playing the Ardennes Christmas round 3 with OJW and finding it much too big for my liking. While I did start this thread by asking about MP games, I am more thinking 2x2 with stock scenarios.

I do appreciate your excellent work, but I would prefer not to have the pressure of running big turns to support the MP game. I know that I sort of buck the trend of many SqB players in that I don't really like bigger scenarios. I love "The Sharp End" series by Oz, and would prefer to see more of that kind of design.

I think that to play MP - at least to develop a cadre of players willing to give it a go - a reinforced company game might be just the thing. Say 2 players per side with each controlling two platoons. One player serves as Company CO and tries to direct both his front and that of the other player's, who might be playing the role of company 1st Sgt. providing "support and assistance" to the two butter bar platoon leaders. The fun would be in coordinating ranged fire of MGs and other ranged weapons and trying to decide who gets any support fires of offboard assets. Also in melding together of different styles and philosophies! Can you imagine the horse-wrangling for smoke rounds?

I'd rather start small-ish and work up to larger scenarios so to establish a working relationship.

I'll do some looking at stock or downloadable scenarios and try to get a bid out in the next week.

Steve

[Jeff Conner]

Go for it Steve. I prefer company sized battles myself. In our RV team game, each player commanded a reinforced company and it felt just about right.

[Cats]

I am very new to the SB games but have played a number of MP games in other venues. You can count me in as willing to play. In the mean time I will continue to learn by playing the game!

[Compass Rose]

I know that I sort of buck the trend of many SqB players in that I don't really like bigger scenarios. I love "The Sharp End" series by Oz, and would prefer to see more of that kind of design.

You are not the only one. I too, do not like big scenarios, if I am the one controlling all of the units on one side. I like smaller scenarios that have alot of action however, don't take forever to move and/or command all of your units. Most importantly, I don't have the patience to continuously watch a 5+ minute turn replay for 20+ turns to see what my opponent did on his turn. To me, it feels too much like work!

I am a big fan of small scenarios such as The Sharp End series however, in the few SB MP games I have played in, they were big scenarios with 3x3 sides and I enjoyed it alot. It was nice to be be able to play the large scenarios which I would normally never play, without having all of that work of controlling everything by yourself. If you get involved with some your closest PBEM regulars, it can be a very enjoyable experience and I highly recommend it. You may find it as enjoyable as watching those old Army/Navy games, back in your day!

I'd rather start small-ish and work up to larger scenarios so to establish a working relationship.

You can't go wrong with that philosophy.

[Cats]

....... back in your day!

Sir, being old and with my eyesight failing, please define!!!

[Cyrano]

This is something I've long wondered about with SB.

Is there a good list -- or even a good way to tell -- which games are suitable for SB?

I have nearly all of them and am absolutely game to try, but I'd like to spring some on my LAN group before going on-line...

Best,

Jim
"Cyrano"
:/7)

[Embis]

Just my two 'penneth, (for those in the states read "for my 2 cents")

I have previously played games using ICQ or some similar client. Once you have overcome the difficulty in getting everyone together at the same time, which isnt actually that difficult if you have enthusiasts, you can play out a game in the course of an hour or so sending files via the file transfer option. I dont see why this wouldn't work for a multiplayer game. Set a date and a time, meet up on ICQ and start playing. You also have the advantage of an open communication channel for general chit chat between turns, which I just know Steve would love.

I would love to join a multiplayer game but pbem wouldnt work for me, or more preciisely, for you! I would be the bottleneck.......and you would all be wanting to wring my bottleneck!

There is always the direct play option, but my recollection of that was that it was a bit unstable, which is why we used ICQ, although, things may have improved significantly with high speed broadband, I was using a US Robotics sportster flash modem at the time, remember those? even the fast ones were slow compared to what most of us have now.

[Stejones82]

I have not forgotten this project, but am full-up at the moment with RL. Hopefully a few weeks will see things settle down some - - - -- or really get cooking!